Difference between revisions of "Legality of routine infant circumcision"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m (Robert Brockway moved page Legality of circumcision to Legality of routine infant circumcision) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | == Selected Jurisdictions == |
||
| + | === Queensland, Australia === |
||
| + | |||
| + | <blockquote>"In 1993, a non-binding research paper of the Queensland Law Reform Commission (Circumcision of Male Infants) concluded that "On a strict interpretation of the assault provisions of the Queensland Criminal Code, routine circumcision of a male infant could be regarded as a criminal act", and that doctors who perform circumcision on male infants may be liable to civil claims by that child at a later date.[20] No prosecutions have occurred in Queensland, and circumcisions continue to be performed."<ref>http://www.cirp.org/library/legal/QLRC/09.html</ref></blockquote> |
||
== See Also == |
== See Also == |
||
Revision as of 15:56, 5 May 2020
Selected Jurisdictions
Queensland, Australia
"In 1993, a non-binding research paper of the Queensland Law Reform Commission (Circumcision of Male Infants) concluded that "On a strict interpretation of the assault provisions of the Queensland Criminal Code, routine circumcision of a male infant could be regarded as a criminal act", and that doctors who perform circumcision on male infants may be liable to civil claims by that child at a later date.[20] No prosecutions have occurred in Queensland, and circumcisions continue to be performed."[1]